get_recent_notes

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing side effects, permissions, errors, or rate limits. It only mentions that notes are returned and ordered, without explicitly confirming a non-destructive read operation or any other behavioral details.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise, using two short sentences with no redundant wording. It front-loads the main action and followed by the key ordering detail.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior, but it omits details like how the folder filter works, whether pagination or max limits apply, and what an empty result means. The presence of an output schema mitigates some of this, but a bit more context would improve completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema descriptions cover all three parameters but are terse: 'days' as 'bounded time window in days', 'limit' as 'maximum returned notes', and 'folder' as 'optional folder filter'. Defaults are present in the schema, but the description adds little beyond what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the action ('Return') and resource ('recently modified notes'), and specifies ordering by modification time. It does not name sibling tools that might serve a similar purpose, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like list_notes, search_by_folder, or read_note. The description explains behavior but not the appropriate context or conditions for choosing this tool over others.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.